If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

Originally Posted by Big_E

Murphy played until he was 37. After age 31 he played in 156, 154, 154 and 153 games, until age 35. His last two seasons he was limited to 18 and 26 games.

I think his argument is that his production started to decline pretty rapidly after his age 31 season. He was really only a slightly above average player at that point rather than the near elite player he was previously.

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

Originally Posted by MoVaughnEatsAlot

I think his argument is that his production started to decline pretty rapidly after his age 31 season. He was really only a slightly above average player at that point rather than the near elite player he was previously.

No, he claimed he retired at 31 because of injury.

His production declined, but he averaged 154 games a year through age 35.

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

Originally Posted by 35Knucklecurve

I thought Canseco was nuts when he came out with his accusations - just a bitter player with an axe to grind.

Really? I thought by then it was old news. Maybe the specific names were sensational, but the general tenor of the accusations didn't seem that surprising. It was several years after Ken Caminiti said that 50% of MLB players used steroids (Rickey Henderson: "Well, Rickey doesn't, so that's 49% right there.")

And much earlier than that, there was plenty of evidence, people just didn't want to know. MLB was having too much fun marketing McGwire and Sosa and Bonds, and they preferred to pretend they didn't know. (I'll say again: read what the Mitchell Report has to say about Brian Sabean, and then someone, please, explain to me how he still has a job.) The bottle of andro in McGwire's locker was certainly a bit of a tip-off, and might at least have called for some good investigative reporting, but the media and fans only wanted to hear more and more about ZOMG! 70 HR! And in 1998, Rick Helling spoke at the winter meeting of the MLBPA about how rampant a problem steroids had become, and the union...ignored him.

So there was plenty of blame to go around, plenty of evidence that people preferred not to see.

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

I've mentioned Sabean and the Mitchell Report a few times, so for those who aren't familiar with it, here's my favorite part:

In August 2002, the Giants were visiting Atlanta for a series with the Braves. At the time, Anderson was traveling with the Giants. [Giants' head trainer Stan Conte] recalls that during this series a Giants player asked Conte about anabolic steroids. Conte refused to identify the player to us, citing athletic trainer privilege. According to Conte, the player told him that he was considering obtaining steroids from Greg Anderson and wanted to know the health issues associated with the use of steroids. In response, Conte explained at some length the health hazards of steroid use and lectured the player about the unfairness to other players posed by the illicit use of steroids. Conte believed that it was “a good lecture” and that he put considerable doubt in the player’s mind.

Conte stated that he reported the incident to general manager Brian Sabean within an hour of its occurrence. He told Sabean he was concerned that Anderson might be distributing steroids to Giants players. While he refused to identify the player who had approached him, Conte otherwise described the conversation to Sabean in detail. Sabean suggested Conte confront Anderson and Bonds about the matter, which Conte refused to do. In Conte’s view, it was not the responsibility of the athletic trainer to address such an issue.

Sabean confirmed in his interview that Conte’s recollection of their conversation was accurate. He also acknowledged that he did not raise the issue with Bonds or Anderson. Instead, he asked Conte if he knew anyone who could “check out” Anderson. Conte said that he knew a Drug Enforcement Administration agent, and Sabean suggested Conte call the agent to check into Anderson. The DEA agent later told Conte that he did not find any information about Anderson. Conte relayed this to Sabean. Sabean told me that he believed that if Anderson was in fact selling drugs illegally the government would have known about it. So when he received the report from Conte, Sabean did not report the issue to anyone in the Giants organization or the Commissioner’s Office, he did not confront Bonds or Anderson, and he did not take any steps to prohibit Anderson from gaining access to Giants facilities. Sabean said that he was not aware at the time of the Major League Baseball policy that required him to report information regarding a player’s drug use to the Commissioner’s Office.

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

Originally Posted by effdamets

That was in the Mitchell report?
Sounds like an excerpt from the book, "Game of Shadows".

http://files.mlb.com/mitchrpt.pdf, pp. 124-5. There's some stuff before that about Conte bringing concerns to Sabean - and to the Commissioner's security director - and basically being blown off. Those incidents weren't as damning as this one, though.

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

Originally Posted by 35Knucklecurve

I'm watching Schilling for my own personal interest in seeing what may lie ahead for Moose. If Schilling grabbed nearly 39% of the votes this year, I would hope that Mike will be near that or possibly a little higher. It's going to be tough in 2014 with Maddux and Glavine eligible next year also.

Neither or Mike or Schilling has had any suspected connection to PED use that I know of and they pitched very succesfully in the steroid era. Although Schilling played 2 more years (20 vs.18) Mike ended up with 270 wins and Schilling, 216. Mike's W/L percentage is higher (.638 vs. .597) and so far, every pitcher who has 100 wins above .500 is in the HOF. Schilling has the WS hardware and of course, Mike doesn't. Although I don't think champsionships should carry weight because it's a team accomplishment, the voters seem to place value on it. Schilling has the K's edge (3,116 vs. 2,813) and also the ERA edge (3.46 vs. 3.68). Mike pitched his entire career in the AL East, Schilling spent 14 years in the NL. Mike has 7 Gold Gloves, Schilling, 0. Neither of them ever won the Cy Young. I do expect Mike to be voted in eventually. IMO, a lot of it depends on whether the voters stick to their stance on PED usage and the percentage has been dropping each year for McGwire, Sosa and Palmeiro.

Moose will probably get fewer votes than Schilling as I'm sure some voters vote for Schilling mainly because of his postseason record. But I hope that Moose will at least get more than 30%. If he's over 30% in his first try, he has a decent shot making the Hall. If he gets less than 30%, I'm not optimistic about his chance.

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

Originally Posted by JL25and3

http://files.mlb.com/mitchrpt.pdf, pp. 124-5. There's some stuff before that about Conte bringing concerns to Sabean - and to the Commissioner's security director - and basically being blown off. Those incidents weren't as damning as this one, though.

I read thru the Mitchell report when it came out. I just didn't remember any of that... Certainly the stuff about Conte and Anderson.
Wow..

"Leave it to Yankees fans to be upset at having too many great players.”—Hitman23

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

Originally Posted by Mr. Mxylsplk

PED's were absolutely banned during the steroid era. In 1991, Fay Vincent issued a memo which explicitly prohibited the use of steroids without a valid prescription. Bud Selig issued a memo reiterating this in 1997. And while baseball had not previously cited steroids explicitly as a prohibited substance, it had banned any prescription medication without a valid prescription in 1971. So using steroids in mlb has been in violation of league rues since any of these guys were in little league

a memo was not a rule. If it were a rule there would be a test and suspension. Neither was done.

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

I read thru the Mitchell report when it came out. I just didn't remember any of that... Certainly the stuff about Conte and Anderson.
Wow..

Yeah, that's why I keep asking: how is it possible that Brian Sabean still has his job?

Given complicity at that level without any sort of consequence, I find it hard to feel too righteously moral and punitive towards the individual players. People knew what was going on and, by willfully ignoring it, effectively condoned the behavior.

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

Originally Posted by JL25and3

Yeah, that's why I keep asking: how is it possible that Brian Sabean still has his job?

Given complicity at that level without any sort of consequence, I find it hard to feel too righteously moral and punitive towards the individual players. People knew what was going on and, by willfully ignoring it, effectively condoned the behavior.

Oh I agree...
I think Sabean took one look at Bonds, then turned to look at the stands in park, saw the seats full of asses and said, I'm not changing anything....

And it was probably that way for many clubs.

"Leave it to Yankees fans to be upset at having too many great players.”—Hitman23

Re: 11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

Originally Posted by kan_t

Moose will probably get fewer votes than Schilling as I'm sure some voters vote for Schilling mainly because of his postseason record. But I hope that Moose will at least get more than 30%. If he's over 30% in his first try, he has a decent shot making the Hall. If he gets less than 30%, I'm not optimistic about his chance.

Schilling's one of those cases that could go either way, IMO. As you said, his post season record is what I think most voters will weigh heavily on - the whole bloody sock nonsense included. I just have my doubts about 214 wins over a 20 year span. Guys like Pedro and Koufax didn't need to have more wins to be voted in because they were almost unhittable for a major part of their careers.